One hopes so. I remember Prince Charles back in the 80s made some daft comment about British troops should be used as mercenaries during peacetime (can't find exact quote). Royals make a habit of saying stupid things and doing stupid things (especially Harry) you hope they learn better. How many stupid things has Harry done over the years? Beyond count now. I'd be more in favour of hunting if it were to hunt and shoot down the royal family tbh.
Jackie Chan is featured in promos aimed at wiping out the ivory trade in Asia, I'm pretty sure he hasn't shot anything with tusks.
everyone knows jackie chan doesn't sue guns. i am sure he's been chased by elephants etc while running funny.. #needtokillsomebeforetheayareallgoneattitude.
I don't think Harry has done many stupid things at all. I think on a few occasions the media have jumped at the chance to have some controversy around him but he's never actually done anything for people to be up in arms about that I've seen.
I tend to look at things from the opposite side. People that do things wrong very rarely got caught, its often every now and again. In that regard, how many things as Harry done that's not been caught by the media? TBH, if I was in his position I'd be a lot worse #noworries
nazi costume for fancy dress. fixed sandhurst results cos he was failing. nah you are prob right if he was just another posh boy and not the illegitimate prince and son of diana then sure none of his antics would get any press. In fairness i'd say he's spoiled rotten but wouldn't we all be? he knows where the ginger gene came from so knows the score. live well and do something which is more than a lot would so.. the former is a lot easier than the latter.
Ignoring your illegitimate theory for a moment and just dealing with what is known to be true, I don't think anything he has done has been that bad. The nazi costume to a fancie dress party was totally blown out of proportion, same as him smoking a joint and the other non-stories which have been turned into big media affairs.
No idea what he has done that hasn't been caught by the media, probably the same amount of stupid things most people do! We can't judge on what we don't know though P.s. I'd be much worse too!
Oh and on topic. There's nothing wrong with a bit of hunting, provided it is sustainable and that preferably the body is used in some way afterwards, for food, warmth etc.... Hunting endangered animals is a big no, but provided it is done in a sustainable way and as ethically as possible I don't see the need to make a big deal out of hunting in general.
I'm from London but i had a grandfather who was brought up on a farm in the north and who along with my gran and mum lived in Africa in the 60's. Lot's of respect for animals but not the same airy fairy animals are people type mentality. Although that said i'm probably the only person in my family that would be on the "hunting is ok" side as my grandfather is dead and the rest of my family are rather left wing in their thinking
Ahem... letting himself get Photod naked in Vegas with a bunch of girls in his room and having his naked body on every front page is pretty "unroyal". Making flippant comments about killing Afghans (even if taken out of context). He can't go 6 months without stirring controversy. /I don't think he's a bad person. Just hasn't learned to cover his arse literally or figuratively from the press. Compare him to his brother who has an almost spotless reputation and history... and is under even more scrutiny.
Classic 2nd/nth born sibling syndrome. But when you consider the 1st born will inherit the title to a kingdom and it's empires commonwealth and protectorates, it is no wonder Harry decided to take up the mantle of black sheep.
I'd be fine with letting them continue to call themselves King, Queen, and whatever- just stop paying them and giving them any, even ceremonial powers- when Lizzie dies- make that the end of the monarchy. Free country- if they (or anyone else) wants to call themselves King Charles. Let them. Let them keep their significant personally owned assets (not the Crown estates- which wrongfully gets attributed to being owned by them... they technically belong to the country). Being who they are- they could still make a killing- especially with all the wealth they already own. They could earn huge amounts of money sponsoring events, or being ambassadors, or giving speaches. They don't need public money. People will still come from oversees to stare at Buckingham Palace and hope to get a glimpse of the public Joe that calls himself King. Elect Rafa Benitez as President for life to fill the ceremonial role that the Queen has now.
The royals do a massive amount for the country and help us maintain our status at the top of the world. Getting rid of them would be a massive mistake. I get that your solution is to let them remain our royal family but remove their connection to the state and any power or money that comes with that, but that also absolves them from any responsibility to put the country first or even bother with any of their duties. I'm all for royalty, they contributes far more than they take. Well, at least the immediate royal family anyway.... Not sure I could argue the use of all the hang on royals bar a few who take their roles seriously lol
belgium, denmark and others have royals. do they live high on the hog or swan round pretending to still rule an empire...no not all. if the were the royals but ordinary enough then that would be best.... fine keep the money they own but i agree on "crown estates" and the same should happen to dukes ans such.. way way too much land in far too few hands
